NFL Files Suit Against Players Union

[Hayvern]

NFL files unfair labor practice charge against players' union

I am not sure how much of this is just a plow, or what, but the NFL, NOT THE OWNERS, but the league itself has filed suit against the players for non-negotiation.

[Seek]

I find the financial risk that these owners are being credited with to be next to nothing.

I don't find losing a few million of your billion dollar pile as a risk.

I see it as a luxury.

Same as everyone points out what a luxury it is to be able to play the game for the rewards that they get.

The most notable difference? Someone has to work and make actual risks for the product to exist.

I hear it all the time "I work hard for everything I have!". Yet nobody I have ever met works as hard as a professional athlete, and the owners most certainly don't. Yet it is always the guy who is actually working for the money that gets the blame for greed.

I mean... "So if the owners give up more money to the players where do you think the owners are going to get it? That's right the fans." Here, you have the players being blamed for the owners raising prices for higher profits.

The owners have cancelled the existing contract.

The owners are demanding more work.

The owners are demanding to pay less to the players.

The owners want to put restrictions on rookie salaries.

The owners walked out on the last bargaining session, after being offered 80% of their financial demands.

The players are not demanding more pay. They have offered to take less.

Somehow, with all of the demands that the owners are making, they are going to accuse the other side, in court, of not making serious negotiations?

And yet the consensus seems to be to find a way to deflect blame from the owners onto the players that actually work for the money that we put into the game.

First off, I highly disagree with the comment about no one works as hard as the athletes. Yeah the owners don't but there are millions of people who work much harder than a professional athlete and get paid millions less. You can not tell me that an athlete works harder than any person is the US service and warrants more money than they do. There are people putting their lives at risk everyday with the police force, and fire departments that get paid very little. People whose main job is to save lives, have to deal with seeing people dead or dying, yet paramedics are paid nothing. Many of them have to take on second jobs on the side to make ends meet.

Then talk about hard taxing jobs of construction, mining, etc.. physical work that drains a person day in and day out.

The players get paid a ton to play. Most of them spend it as they make it. If anything the owners should pay them with some sort of trust fund, preventing them from blowing it all a couple years after they retire.

Second, I am not sure where you heard all of the information about the owners, because that cetrtainly sounded like biased approach. Not saying you are wrong, but everything you mentioned has been discussed on the radio and there is sound logic to what the owners are demanding. There is also sound logic to what the players are asking. There is right and wrong on both sides.

[Hayvern]

La Russa says union is leaning on Pujols; union denies it

Is this what you guys want seriously? Do you want the players union now twisting the arms of players and agents to hold out for the most money even if the player would take less to stay on a team?

I know this is not football related, but it is if the players get what they want and that is a non-capped league. I could see a world where the union is already strong arming players to hold out for as much as they can forcing owners to bend over to pay them more.

What happens when owners cannot pay? The player goes to another team that can.

BTW, I am so finished with baseball, I am tired of these players holding out for the most money, it will be sacrilage if Pujols goes to the Yankees, but that is what will likely happen now. I am so sick of this, if a deal does not get done and Pujols ends up on another team, I will never watch another baseball game again.

[OPLookn]

I find the financial risk that these owners are being credited with to be next to nothing.

I don't find losing a few million of your billion dollar pile as a risk.

I see it as a luxury.

Acquiring a business and running it is always a risk, if it wasn't then everyone would be a business owner. Who cares if they have piles of money. Every venture is different from another and if I have 10 business each business is independent and I have to keep my eye on the ball for each one of them. So yeah while it's a luxury I've never met a single person that says hey I wanna own something that's going to lose me money every year...well other than a vehicle.

The most notable difference? Someone has to work and make actual risks for the product to exist.

I hear it all the time "I work hard for everything I have!". Yet nobody I have ever met works as hard as a professional athlete, and the owners most certainly don't. Yet it is always the guy who is actually working for the money that gets the blame for greed.

That's complete and utter horse you know what. You seem to be saying that physical work is the only type of work that counts. Any type of business has many facets that you have to account for and be good at. I would say that many of the people in the fortune 500, Coach Haley or Pioli work just as hard or harder as the players do. Because there in shape doesn't make them the hardest workers out there.

Plus as another post had said there are so many other people out there sacrificing more for much less than athletes.

I mean... "So if the owners give up more money to the players where do you think the owners are going to get it? That's right the fans." Here, you have the players being blamed for the owners raising prices for higher profits.

I may be off on this part but I'm pretty sure that I read that the players are paid off of ticket sales. I know for sure that the parking fee's go to the city. So if the players want more the only place they're going to get it is from the fans paying more for seats so yes, they are going to get it from the fans. The rest of the money is from tv deals, jerseys, and beer/food you buy at the games. I'm sure there's more but from what I understand that's why I have a problem with it.

The owners have cancelled the existing contract.

The owners are demanding more work.

The owners are demanding to pay less to the players.

The owners want to put restrictions on rookie salaries.

The owners walked out on the last bargaining session, after being offered 80% of their financial demands.

The players are not demanding more pay. They have offered to take less.

Somehow, with all of the demands that the owners are making, they are going to accuse the other side, in court, of not making serious negotiations?

And yet the consensus seems to be to find a way to deflect blame from the owners onto the players that actually work for the money that we put into the game.

The CBA had one more year in it so I'm not sure why one more year is such a big deal?? Who cares if the owners canceled it...it was going to be a big fight at some point anyway.

Of course the owners wanna pay the players less and put in a rookie pay scale! Do you buy a house or car for what the person originally asks? Why would you give them exactly what they want?

Overall I'm sure both sides came to the table with "I want's" and they were so far off that they're both going to have to come back with realistic expectations.

But to say that the players are being the good guys because they were going to take less money is ridiculous. They may have shifted where the money was going but I can guarantee you're never going to go to your boss and ask to be paid less money. That they're a union and they'd be asking for overall compensation is completely absurd. People are fixating on the CBA asking for less of the profits and not looking at the overall picture. What the owners are looking at is overall compensation and what most of the media focuses on is revenue split.

[matthewschiefs]

First off, I highly disagree with the comment about no one works as hard as the athletes. Yeah the owners don't but there are millions of people who work much harder than a professional athlete and get paid millions less. You can not tell me that an athlete works harder than any person is the US service and warrants more money than they do. There are people putting their lives at risk everyday with the police force, and fire departments that get paid very little. People whose main job is to save lives, have to deal with seeing people dead or dying, yet paramedics are paid nothing. Many of them have to take on second jobs on the side to make ends meet.

This I agree with. The firefighters miltary don't get an offseason. Yes the players still have to stay in shape during this time of year but so do the firefighters and miltary people. The players work harder physicaly then most of us but there are more kinds of work the phusical work.

Acquiring a business and running it is always a risk, if it wasn't then everyone would be a business owner. Who cares if they have piles of money. Every venture is different from another and if I have 10 business each business is independent and I have to keep my eye on the ball for each one of them. So yeah while it's a luxury I've never met a single person that says hey I wanna own something that's going to lose me money every year...well other than a vehicle.




That's complete and utter horse you know what. You seem to be saying that physical work is the only type of work that counts. Any type of business has many facets that you have to account for and be good at. I would say that many of the people in the fortune 500, Coach Haley or Pioli work just as hard or harder as the players do. Because there in shape doesn't make them the hardest workers out there.

Plus as another post had said there are so many other people out there sacrificing more for much less than athletes.



I may be off on this part but I'm pretty sure that I read that the players are paid off of ticket sales. I know for sure that the parking fee's go to the city. So if the players want more the only place they're going to get it is from the fans paying more for seats so yes, they are going to get it from the fans. The rest of the money is from tv deals, jerseys, and beer/food you buy at the games. I'm sure there's more but from what I understand that's why I have a problem with it.



The CBA had one more year in it so I'm not sure why one more year is such a big deal?? Who cares if the owners canceled it...it was going to be a big fight at some point anyway.

Of course the owners wanna pay the players less and put in a rookie pay scale! Do you buy a house or car for what the person originally asks? Why would you give them exactly what they want?

Overall I'm sure both sides came to the table with "I want's" and they were so far off that they're both going to have to come back with realistic expectations.

But to say that the players are being the good guys because they were going to take less money is ridiculous. They may have shifted where the money was going but I can guarantee you're never going to go to your boss and ask to be paid less money. That they're a union and they'd be asking for overall compensation is completely absurd. People are fixating on the CBA asking for less of the profits and not looking at the overall picture. What the owners are looking at is overall compensation and what most of the media focuses on is revenue split.

I don't think you can 100% defend the owners for opting out of the CBA given anther year they would have had more time to work out a deal. But it's not like this whole mess would not have happend if they didn't. And it was the right the owners had to opt out. Do we jump on a player when they take a right they have in the CBA? I don't think so.

Most the media is pro players since a good part of the football media is former players. They are trying to make the players out to be the good guys while the owners are just the greedy bunch holding the players back. I get it everyone hates the bosses. But the owners are doing the same thing the players are fighting to get a better deal for themselfs.

[chief31]

While you and I have been through this time and time again I just have a question If a judge would find that the NFLs claim has merit and rule in there favor would that show you that the players are a bigger part of the problem then what you thought before? I no that's a big if I am just curious to know if that would change your thoughts on this whole mess.

I certainly would.

The only thing that I have heard about the players trying to gain in all of this is improved healthcare.

If there were more, then I would lean less heavily in their favor.

But, all things being equal, I do lean toward the players over the owners. No denying my bias. They are the product that I love, and they are the one's working for the industry.

We pay for what they bring. The owners are just money men.

First off, I highly disagree with the comment about no one works as hard as the athletes. Yeah the owners don't but there are millions of people who work much harder than a professional athlete and get paid millions less. You can not tell me that an athlete works harder than any person is the US service and warrants more money than they do. There are people putting their lives at risk everyday with the police force, and fire departments that get paid very little. People whose main job is to save lives, have to deal with seeing people dead or dying, yet paramedics are paid nothing. Many of them have to take on second jobs on the side to make ends meet.

Then talk about hard taxing jobs of construction, mining, etc.. physical work that drains a person day in and day out.

While many soldiers, police and others may be at a higher risk in their jobs, physically, only the soldier can be compared, and only during basic training to the amount of energy that professional athletes put out.

As for the everyday physical jobs, I have done many of them myself. And no. The physical effort does not match an athlete's.

A lot of factors beyond that physical effort could be included to change my mind about what job is "harder".

And it is just my opinion, either way.

The players get paid a ton to play. Most of them spend it as they make it. If anything the owners should pay them with some sort of trust fund, preventing them from blowing it all a couple years after they retire.

There is certainly some merit to that idea. No argument.

Second, I am not sure where you heard all of the information about the owners, because that cetrtainly sounded like biased approach. Not saying you are wrong, but everything you mentioned has been discussed on the radio and there is sound logic to what the owners are demanding. There is also sound logic to what the players are asking. There is right and wrong on both sides.

Logic, or none, the list of demands is awefully one-sided, as far all that I have heard.

La Russa says union is leaning on Pujols; union denies it

Is this what you guys want seriously? Do you want the players union now twisting the arms of players and agents to hold out for the most money even if the player would take less to stay on a team?

I know this is not football related, but it is if the players get what they want and that is a non-capped league. I could see a world where the union is already strong arming players to hold out for as much as they can forcing owners to bend over to pay them more.

What happens when owners cannot pay? The player goes to another team that can.

BTW, I am so finished with baseball, I am tired of these players holding out for the most money, it will be sacrilage if Pujols goes to the Yankees, but that is what will likely happen now. I am so sick of this, if a deal does not get done and Pujols ends up on another team, I will never watch another baseball game again.

Baseball does kind of s***.

And, while I have no doubt that players would prefer a non-capped league, I have not heard any mention of the players attempting to put that into the current negotiations.

I believe that the salary cap in The NFL is a foregone conclusion in all current talks.

If it were not, I don't think that the discussions about how to split the "total revenue" and "all revenue" would be present.

But, I don't follow every last bit to the story. So, if you have something that I have missed, I would be happy to see it.

[Hayvern]

I read an article earlier this year about the players pushing for a lift on the salary cap. Unfortunately, I cannot find the article anymore and I have been looking.

If the players were all that concerned about safety and health, why did they scream bloody murder for the changes to the hitting rules? There were a number of players that started claiming that the league was going to be playing flag football now.

I don't really have a side in this deal, except for the fact that both sides are equally as bad, but since we seem to have so many people siding with the union and the players in this, I think it is important to remember that without the owners, and their money, most these guys would be just another juvenile deliquent with a gun or just another drunk driver.

And for those of you who claim that you don't trust the owners, well you had better take a good hard look at the union. Unions are nothing more than legalized extortion.

[Coach]

I think it is important to remember that without the owners, and their money, most these guys would be just another juvenile deliquent with a gun or just another drunk driver.

And for those of you who claim that you don't trust the owners, well you had better take a good hard look at the union. Unions are nothing more than legalized extortion.

Quit holding back and tell us how you really feel Vern.

[chiefnut]

At the owners last offer, pro footbal players would have by far the worst CBA for any league in the world.

Owners are the bad guys here. The players are both the product and the employees, pay them.

so you have read their proposal, where can i find it????

[chiefnut]

so you have read their proposal, where can i find it????

here is a quote i found;
When Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti met with the media in late January, he said the revenue split (60 percent of total revenues to the players after a $1 billion credit off the top to the owners) "is not working for the owners."
"If your business gave you a 50 percent raise and you and your wife started spending 60 percent more money, you're not going to be better off," he said. "Everybody keeps talking about the health of the league because they keep seeing the revenues go up. They don't know that expenses are rising at a higher rate than those revenues. We've got to get that right. We've got to get that in check."
Because no game revenue will be lost unless the lockout lasts until September, the two sides are engaging in a high-stakes poker game. The hard-liners appear to rule the day for now.
"I think there is middle ground to be found," Roberts said. "It's just a matter of convincing enough players, enough owners, that they've got to start making compromises."
ken.murray@baltsun.com



this is all i found w/any actual numbers

[chief31]

If the players were all that concerned about safety and health, why did they scream bloody murder for the changes to the hitting rules? There were a number of players that started claiming that the league was going to be playing flag football now.

There is a pretty big difference between accepting the risks of the job, as-is, and adding to it.

I have to believe that you know that.

I don't really have a side in this deal, except for the fact that both sides are equally as bad, but since we seem to have so many people siding with the union and the players in this, I think it is important to remember that without the owners, and their money, most these guys would be just another juvenile deliquent with a gun or just another drunk driver.

And for those of you who claim that you don't trust the owners, well you had better take a good hard look at the union. Unions are nothing more than legalized extortion.

But you don't have a side.

While I won't defend a union as completely fair and legit, I will challenge that line of nonsense.

A union is the laborers uniting to create a demand for the product that they provide to a customer.

That is plain and simple capitalism right there. Supply and demand.

The fact is that a union. most certainly, is something more than legalized extortion.

That remark was a lie.

Is there some corruption within some unions? Yep.

But not enough to offset the vast corruption that exists from the elite owners and CEOs.

And dealing with people who excel at finding and exploiting every loop-hole will teach you to find and exploit every loop-hole.

Prior to unions, and in nations that currently allow capitalist corporations to function free of unions or government restrictions, we can easily see how the owners and CEOs will treat those who help them to create their products.

As poorly as they can.